[Development] The future of smart pointers in Qt API

[Ville Voutilainen]

On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 01:14, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development
<development at qt-project.org> wrote:
> With this I can totally agree. As I said countless times, the only way
> to influence such naming decisions is working _with_ upstream (by the
> way, the meetings are pretty much public) and bringing your arguments on
> naming there. After, it's too late, and as an overall minority in C++
> we'll get those decisions made by someone else and we'll just have to
> live with them. It's not a good position to be in.
>
> Between C++11, 14, 17 and 20, by heart I can only name _one_ thing that
> has been introduced in the Standard Library which has had an inspiration
> coming from Qt (C++20's std::map::contains()).

For what it's worth, we have had a TQtC employee in the standards
committee for three years,
and that employee (in case it's unclear, I'm talking about me) has
been a committee member
for a decade. The request "can you help us write/champion/defend a
proposal for $foo?" has
landed in my inbox exactly zero times during either of those periods,
from Qt developers.